But having read that article about the woman who breast fed her baby to death (according to retarded-ass lawyers), knowing about folk like the Phelps family, and that people actually put bacon into donuts, then I have so little faith in humanity wishing to become "decent people" that I think they could use having their main source of being violent bastards taken away from them.

Essentially, the human race is an incurable - but manageable - disease.

Obviously, South Carolina is irretrievable, and sure, assholes will always exist. The main source of people being violent bastards isn't guns, though. It's their asshole families not doing their jobs to bring kids up as upstanding citizens.

To the idea that the harder you make it for someone to get their hands on something, the less likely they are to use it -wasn't that what Prohibition was about? Isn't that what the whole "War on Drugs" is about? Shit, online piracy tends to turn that argument on its ear all by itself. If people want something bad enough, they'll figure out how to get it. The only way your philosophy works at all is to shut down all gun manufacturers, and even then, you'll have the firearm equivalent of hillbilly moonshiners.

Sean is right, the problem isn't the availability of guns (at least, it's not the major problem), it's people.

But that would require the demand for guns to be similar to that of alcohol or media. To equate a gun to an episode of Game of Thrones or a pint is ridiculous if you ask me. Maybe it's just a cultural disconnect, I know gun fetishism is part of US culture (Joey's first paragraph being a blatant example) but I didn't think it was as rampant as you seem to be suggesting.

To the idea that the harder you make it for someone to get their hands on something, the less likely they are to use it -wasn't that what Prohibition was about? Isn't that what the whole "War on Drugs" is about? Shit, online piracy tends to turn that argument on its ear all by itself. If people want something bad enough, they'll figure out how to get it. The only way your philosophy works at all is to shut down all gun manufacturers, and even then, you'll have the firearm equivalent of hillbilly moonshiners.

Sean is right, the problem isn't the availability of guns (at least, it's not the major problem), it's people.

But that would require the demand for guns to be similar to that of alcohol or media. To equate a gun to an episode of Game of Thrones or a pint is ridiculous if you ask me. Maybe it's just a cultural disconnect, I know gun fetishism is part of US culture (Joey's first paragraph being a blatant example) but I didn't think it was as rampant as you seem to be suggesting.

Smokey wrote:

Blokeymon wrote:

Take away the shitbird parents, the level of asshole decreases.

Fix'd.

Do both. Optimal outcome.

You keep talking about guns being an American thing, but there have been shooting events at the Olympics for the past century. If we can have guns used in a responsible manner at the bi-annual event devoted to bringing the world closer together, I think there's a place for guns in a modern society, regardless of culture.

Much like alcohol consumption doesn't equate to alcoholism, gun ownership doesn't equate to fetishism. A gun is a tool, nothing more. People can use that tool responsibly, be it for self-defense, as a collector's item, or as a hobby (i.e. hunting, shooting ranges or marksmanship events). Your statement that guns are tools of destruction isn't grounds for punishing those that use them in a lawful manner. It's grounds for stronger control regarding who can own them.

There's a huge difference between a person shooting a clay pigeon in the Olympics and the perceived right to shoot to kill an intruder or carry a concealed weapon. If people want to pursue clay pigeon shooting or hunting as a hobby then let them rent a gun from a strictly licensed venue that's used within the grounds of that venue. If that's all they want to do with guns then there's absolutely no need for the weapons to leave the premises of that venue. The vast destructive potential of a gun HUGELY outweighs its merits as a hobby item, and you know what? I'd rather see these figures drop by any percentage than have them continue just so someone can collect weaponry.

But that's the thing isn't it? I'd choose security, you'd choose liberty. It's the culture and that's ultimately what this comes down to.

You might view fetishism as a strong word for it and I've just finished writing an essay on Marx so maybe the term in general is just fairly fresh in mind but honestly, I call it as I see it. A fetish can be defined as a "man-made object that has power over others" and when I see people like Joey saying he wants to move to the "glorious state of Vermont" because they've got lax gun laws, I can't help but think guns carry some serious influence over him.

Also, just to round this all off: I think using the second amendment as the thing that legitimises the US' gun culture is a bunch of bullshit, but then again I think codified constitutions are a really stupid idea so that's probably just me projecting a bit.

Absolutely not. It takes lives. We are reckless and make mistakes by nature; restricting access to something that has the power of destroying someone's life and the ones around them isn't comparable to restricting access to something that doesn't.

Absolutely not. It takes lives. We are reckless and make mistakes by nature; restricting access to something that has the power of destroying someone's life and the ones around them isn't comparable to restricting access to something that doesn't.

Trucks/Lorries supply food and goods to all sorts of places. They're automobiles.

So on and so forth.

It's fucking brutal but the advantages of cars vastly outweigh the toll they exert. There a tangible, material and guaranteed gains to be had from the ownership of a car. Guns give you what? A hobby? Not worth it. The potential that on the off chance that somebody successfully breaks into your home while you are present? Not worth it.

You know more people die every year from automobile accidents than firearm related deaths but that isn't the point here. The point of this thread is for a debate and all I am seeing from the anti-gun people are just excuses to why people shouldn't have guns. Someone give me a detailed post about why we shouldn't have guns and then I'll add my two cents to that post.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum